Medicine and mind-body dualism: a reply to mehta′s critique

Abstract

Neeta Mehta recently advanced the thesis that medical practice is facing a crisis today. In her paper “Mind-body dualism: a critique from a health perspective” she attributes the crisis to the philosophy of Descartes and set out to understand why this dualism is still alive despite its disavowal from philosophers, health practitioners and lay people. The aim of my reply to her critique is three-fold. First, I draw attention to a more fundamental problem and show that dualism is inescapable—scientifically and commonsensically. I then focus on the self-conscious emotions of shame, guilt and remorse, and argue that the self is not identical with a brain. The third section draws attention to the crisis in psychiatry and stipulates some of the main reasons why this is so. Contrary to Mehta's thesis, the health profession faces a crisis because of physicalism and biological reductionism.

The Problem of Dualism in Modern Western Medicine

“…Some health professionals have noted the importance of patient intentionality in successful therapeutic work and have used this to support the existence of dualism through an argument that can be summarized as “minds change brains” (for example, see Beauregard and O’Leary, 2007[2]; Joubert, 2014[9]). This claim is problematic because it is both nonscientific (as the hypothesis of the existence of a noncorporeal “mind” is not falsifiable through measurement) and not parsimonious.…”

“…A second common medical argument against reductionist monist explanations of mental disorders has rested on the generally low efficacy rates of pharmacological interventions intended to treat these disorders (Joubert, 2014[9]). Without question, the vast majority of drugs used to treat brain disorders suppress symptoms rather than treat causes of disease, have low rates of long-term treatment success, and produce unacceptable side effects.…”

Meditation Experiences, Self, and Boundaries of Consciousness

“…Descartes proposed that the mind and body are incapable of existing in unison because the physical body could not 'think' but the immaterial mind can, thereby forcing a person to exist in two perspectives simultaneously-one physically in the body and one mentally in the mind [4]. Similar to Cartesian dualism, theories such as biological reductionism, physicalism or materialism, and the philosophy of mind [6] all consider the body as separate from the mind, defining the mind only as a function of the brain. These theories suggest one is at the mercy of what the brain believes to exist versus its interpretation of what it thinks exists, reducing the person to simply a giant brain with synapses which does the thinking, feeling, and decision making [6].…”

“…Similar to Cartesian dualism, theories such as biological reductionism, physicalism or materialism, and the philosophy of mind [6] all consider the body as separate from the mind, defining the mind only as a function of the brain. These theories suggest one is at the mercy of what the brain believes to exist versus its interpretation of what it thinks exists, reducing the person to simply a giant brain with synapses which does the thinking, feeling, and decision making [6]. However, these theories fail to explain how the mind is capable of doubting the stimuli it receives from the body, searching for a truth or certainty, which is evidence of a thinking mind, independent from bodily stimuli received by the brain [5].…”